Ron Paul and Former U. N. Ambassador Affirm Connection to Vatican and New World Order
They can manipulate anything, even the Congressional Record
By Greg Szymanski
Feb. 22, 2012
If you don’t believe the Vatican is involved up to their dirty necks in the NWO plan to bring fascism to America, listen to the words of U.N. Ambassador from Lebanon and former President of the Gen. Assembly of the U.N., Charles Malik.
If you don’t believe Ron Paul is a member of the same group, who supports Rome, listen to what he said to Congress, coming later in the article.
Here is U.N Malik talking to the European Union big shots:
“The only hope for this western world is an alliance between the Roman Catholic church which is the most commonly, influential, controlling, unifying, element, in Europe and the western orthodox church.
“The only hope for the western world lies then in a united Europe under the control of the Pope.”
If you don’t believe the Vatican has infiltrated America, listen to the words of Ex Jesuit Priest Alberto Rivera, someone who tried to warn Americans:
“The main underlying Roman Catholic purpose is to infiltrate, and penetrate all the areas of life, were the Roman Catholic Church can have control with excess in a One World Government.
“This has been in preparation especially since the formation of the Jesuit order in 1541 to infiltrate absolutely every area of society so as to take over the world politically and religiously. The two main doctrines of Catholicism that define this are:
“The doctrine of the Apostolic succession, which is actually the Papacy. And the doctrine of temporal power which is secular government. The office of Pope illustrates this easily… The Pope is the head of the Church as well as the head of the State of Rome.”
And if you believe, Ron Paul is the next “great hope” for America, listen to what he said to Congress in the wake of John Paul II’s death, linking him to the Vatican and its New World Order in 2005. This was taken directly from his speech as listed in 2005.
Members of Congress from both political parties outdid themselves last week in heaping praise upon Pope John Paul II in the wake of his passing. Many spoke at length on the floor of the House of Representatives, and some even flew to Rome for his funeral.
I’m happy to witness so many politicians honoring a great man of God and peace. The problem, however, is that so few of them honored him during his lifetime by their actions as legislators. In fact, most members of Congress support policies that are totally at odds with Catholic teachings.
Just two years ago conservatives were busy scolding the Pope for his refusal to back our invasion of Iraq. One conservative media favorite even made the sickening suggestion that the Pope was the enemy of the United States because he would not support our aggression in the Middle East. The Pontiff would not ignore the inherent contradiction in being pro-life and pro-war, nor distort just war doctrine to endorse attacking a nation that clearly posed no threat to America – and conservatives resented it. September 11th did not change everything, and the Pope understood that killing is still killing. The hypocritical pro-war conservatives lauding him today have very short memories.
Liberals also routinely denounced the Pope for maintaining that Catholicism, like all religions, has rules that cannot simply be discarded to satisfy the cultural trends of the time. The political left has been highly critical of the Pope’s positions on abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage, feminism, and contraception. Many liberals frankly view Catholicism as an impediment to the fully secular society they hope to create.
Both conservatives and liberals cannot understand that the Pope’s pronouncements were theological, not political. He was one of the few humans on earth who could not be bullied or threatened by any government. He was a man of God, not a man of the state. He was not a policy maker, but rather a steward of long-established Catholic doctrine. His mission was to save souls, not serve the political agendas of any nation, party, or politician.
To the secularists, this was John Paul II’s unforgivable sin – he placed service to God above service to the state. Most politicians view the state, not God, as the supreme ruler on earth. They simply cannot abide a theology that does not comport with their vision of unlimited state power. This is precisely why both conservatives and liberals savaged John Paul II when his theological pronouncements did not fit their goals. But perhaps their goals simply were not godly.
Unlike most political leaders, the Pope understood that both personal and economic liberties are necessary for human virtue to flourish. Virtue, after all, involves choices. Politics and government operate to deny people the freedom to make their own choices.
The Pope’s commitment to human dignity, grounded in the teachings of Christ, led him to become an eloquent and consistent advocate for an ethic of life, exemplified by his struggles against abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty. Yet what institutions around the world sanction abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty?
Historically, religion always represented a threat to government because it competes for the loyalties of the people. In modern America, however, most religious institutions abandoned their independence long ago, and now serve as cheerleaders for state policies like social services, faith-based welfare, and military aggression in the name of democracy. Few American churches challenge state actions at all, provided their tax-exempt status is maintained. This is why Washington politicians ostensibly celebrate religion – it no longer threatens their supremacy. Government has co-opted religion and family as the primaryorganizing principle of our society. The federal government is boss, and everybody knows it. But no politician will ever produce even a tiny fraction ofthe legacy left by Pope John Paul II.
Now, checking the 2012 version on his website, it seems to be tempered a bit, but the same loyalty is there. I wondered why it was changed?
Honoring Pope John Paul II – A Consistent Pro-Life Figure
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join my colleagues in paying tribute to the life and legacy of Pope John Paul II. Pope John Paul II was one of the great religious leaders of modern times, and an eloquent champion of human freedom and dignity. Unlike all-too-many misguided religious leaders, the Pope understood that liberty, both personal and economic, is a necessary condition for the flourishing of human virtue.
The Popes commitment to human dignity, grounded in the teachings of Christ, led him to become one of the most eloquent spokesmen for the consistent ethic of life, exemplified by his struggles against abortion, war, euthanasia, and the death penalty.
Unfortunately, few in American politics today adhere to the consistent ethic of life, thus we see some who cheered the Popes stand against the war and the death penalty while downplaying or even openly defying his teachings against abortion and euthanasia.
Others who cheered the Popes opposition to abortion and euthanasia were puzzled or hostile to his opposition to war. Many of these pro-life supporters of war tried to avoid facing the inherent contradictions in their position by distorting the Just War doctrine, which the Pope properly interpreted as denying sanction to the Iraq war. One prominent conservative commentator even suggested that the pope was the enemy of the United States.
In conclusion, I am pleased to pay tribute to Pope John Paul II. I would encourage those who wish to honor his memory to reflect on his teachings regarding war and the sanctity of life, and consider the inconsistencies in claiming to be pro-life but supporting the senseless killing of innocent people that inevitably accompanies militarism, or in claiming to be pro-peace and pro-compassion but supporting the legal killing of the unborn.
Greg’s Notes: I believe a vote for Ron Paul is another vote for the NWO for you see they are all things liberal and conservative. I might add when Ron Paul was courting any all reporters in the alternative media, he refused to be questioned by me because he knew what was coming — the truth about his connection to Rome and the Papacy. If this issue isn’t important why would the speech be changed for posterity? Maybe somebody is hiding something?
Don’t forget to subscribe below and get all of Greg’s past articles and radio interviews for either 10 bucks a month or 125.00 lifetime.